Search

Begin New Search Topic International Community Political Geography China

1. The European China Strategy to Enhance Economic Security

Author:
Hyun Jean Lee
Publication Date:
11-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
The recent strategy change of the European countries toward China has identifiable triggering factors such as the continuation of high growth in the Chinese economy, rising status of China in the international community, and China’s FDI expansion. The West has criticized the Chinese Communist Party’s dealing with human rights issues and media control, which was further aggravated by China’s pro-Russian stance upon the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Eventually, the European countries responded with confrontational strategies against China. This study analyzes these recent de-risking methods of the EU and four European countries – i.e., Germany, France, United Kingdom, and Poland – regarding economic relations with China. Finally, the Brief concludes with an assessment of the impact of the recent changes in Europe’s China strategy on Korea and policy recommendations.
Topic:
Human Rights, Foreign Direct Investment, International Community, Economic Security, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and Asia

2. An Overview of International Discourse surrounding China and Its Implications

Author:
Jai Chul Heo
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This study began with the idea that the international community’s discourse on China may not be produced, distributed, and utilized separately in each country, but instead formed within a huge global network. Building upon this idea, this study tried to examine the essential substance of discourse on China, who produces it, and how it is being distributed and utilized in the international community. At the same time, we examined the political dynamics under which the international community’s discourse on China is produced. This study first selected the issues of the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and the COVID-19 pandemic and conducted a case analysis of the international community’s discourse on China, focusing on these issues. This analysis produced many interesting facts. In particular, we found that political images of the BRI tended to have a stronger influence than direct experience with the initiative in shaping the international community’s discourse on the BRI. Through the analysis of these three cases, it became possible to identify countries, regions, and organizations that play an important role in shaping the international community’s discourse on China. Among countries or regions, the United States and the United Kingdom appear to be the most prominent actors in shaping the international community’s discourse on China. In addition, Japan and Taiwan, both of whom are China’s neighbors and have a tense relationship with China in the context of establishing order in the Asian region, also emerged as important actors. Accordingly, this study analyzed in more depth the mechanisms of how the discourse on China is being formed within the relevant countries and regions, targeting the U.S., EU (UK), Taiwan, and Japan. At the same time, we also analyze the formation of discourse on China within Korea, along with ASEAN, which is becoming increasingly important geopolitically, as can be seen from the U.S.’ Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) Strategy and China’s BRI.
Topic:
Geopolitics, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), International Community, COVID-19, and Discourse
Political Geography:
China and Asia

3. The Distortion of UN Resolution 2758 to Limit Taiwan’s Access to the United Nations

Author:
Jessica Drun and Bonnie S. Glaser
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:
There is a campaign underway by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to reinterpret UN Resolution 2758 as based on its “One China” Principle and spread the fallacy that, through the resolution, UN member states came to a determination that Taiwan is a part of the PRC. Yet, in passing the resolution in 1971, the countries solely intended to grant the seat occupied by the Republic of China in the General Assembly and the Security Council to the PRC. This is reflected in the official historic record and meeting minutes as well as in the resolutions raised at the time for the General Assembly’s consideration. The PRC understood then that the resolution did not contain the Taiwan conclusions it wanted. Prime Minister Zhou Enlai noted that, if Resolution 2758 passed, “the status of Taiwan is not yet decided.” Beijing, through its proxies at the UN, expressed its unwillingness to join the organization if it allowed “‘two Chinas,’ ‘one China, one Taiwan,’ or ‘the status of Taiwan remaining to be determined.’” However, given that Beijing did not enjoy the same level of international influence then as it does today, it did not reject the resolution when it passed. Instead, PRC officials assumed the “China” seat and only later began to leverage their position to promote Beijing’s stance on Taiwan at the UN level. The PRC’s efforts to rewrite Taiwan’s status at the UN ramped up in the 1990s and early 2000s at the same time as the island’s democratization. The PRC has since worked to “internationalize” its “One China” Principle and to conflate it with UN Resolution 2758, a revisionist shift from the original intent of the document. Beijing has managed to further institutionalize and normalize its stance on Taiwan within the UN by signing secret agreements with UN bodies, restricting Taiwan’s access to the UN and its facilities, and embedding PRC nationals across various levels of UN staff. The UN and its specialized agencies have not made the texts of these agreements, such as that of the 2005 memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the PRC and the World Health Organization, available to the public or to any entity beyond the main signatories, though leaked guidance memos provide insights into the scope of the MOU’s content (See Appendix B). The PRC has likewise sought to force its views on nomenclature relating to Taiwan within the UN. This includes withholding UN accreditation from NGOs and civil society groups that do not refer to Taiwan as a part of the PRC in their organizational materials or on their websites. Recently, it has come to light that the PRC and its representatives have altered historic UN documents to change references of “Taiwan” to “Taiwan, Province of China.” (Examples are presented in a case study.) These developments have played out alongside marked shifts in the guidance of the UN Office of Legal Affairs on Taiwan, where it only 15 years ago cited an ambiguous and undefined “One China” policy, but now reiterates the PRC position on Taiwan. The PRC has likewise used UN Resolution 2758 and bilateral normalization agreements with other member states to falsely claim that its “One China” Principle is a universally accepted norm. It has also ensured that a plurality of countries back its views at the UN level and will cast votes alongside it—particularly on issues of Taiwan’s participation—and it reinforces this support through economic pressure on governments. The PRC’s efforts to constrain Taiwan at the UN have broader implications for international governance, as it shows a prioritization of one member state’s national interests over the global community’s—as exemplified by Taiwan’s damaging exclusion from global health debates during the coronavirus pandemic. The United States opposes the PRC’s attempts to redefine UN Resolution 2758 and has pushed back against UN statements claiming that Taiwan is a province of the PRC, including issuing a 2007 “non-paper” asserting its position that Taiwan’s status is not yet determined. The PRC has recently attempted to use its narrative of the “One China” Principle as embedded in UN Resolution 2758 to call into question the legitimacy of longstanding US policy on Taiwan—including the Taiwan Relations Act, which is US law.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Sovereignty, United Nations, and International Community
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, and United States of America

4. A World Dividing: The International Implications of the Sino-American Rift

Author:
Chas W. Freeman Jr.
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
The Trump administration has declared economic war on China. The United States has raised taxes on Chinese imports to levels not seen since the Smoot–Hawley tariffs of the Great Depression. Over the course of this year, Chinese imports of American goods have decreased by 26.4 percent, while China’s exports to the United States are down 10.7 percent. Washington has embargoed exports to China of a constantly expanding list of high-tech manufactures. It seeks to block Chinese telecommunications companies from third-country markets. The United States has mounted a vigorous campaign to persuade other countries to reject Chinese investments in their infrastructure, notably in the case of 5G telecommunications networks.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Global Political Economy, Trade Wars, International Community, and Exports
Political Geography:
United States, China, Asia, and Global Focus

5. The United States and Future Policy Options in the Taiwan Strait

Author:
Mark Stokes
Publication Date:
02-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
Taiwan is a core interest in U.S. foreign policy. Its values, technological prowess, and geostrategic position align with foundational American values and priorities for the region, making it a crucial U.S. partner in the Asia Pacific. As such, ensuring a stable and positive future for Taiwan as a democracy and a primary contributor to the global economy and international community is a high priority. This monograph concludes that a more objective representation of the status quo in the Taiwan Strait may better serve long-term U.S. interests.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Partnerships, Geopolitics, Global Political Economy, and International Community
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America